Ben Laurie writes:
 > Russell Nelson wrote:
 > > 
 > > Ben Laurie writes:
 > >  > I have to say I'm becoming increasingly disenchanted with the term Open
 > >  > Source, and think it muddies the water even more than "free software"
 > >  > does.
 > > 
 > > Why?
 > 
 > Because it lets people use licences that aren't really free but are
 > "open source" in some sense. At least, that appears to be happening.

Like what?

 > People may have been confused by the two meanings of "free", but
 > switching to "open" has not, IMO, reduced that confusion and has
 > introduced vast new areas of uncertainty and doubt.

Well, that's not part of the plan.

 > >  > So, what we need, IMO, if anything, is a free software evangelist (who
 > >  > isn't totally fixated on GPL).
 > > 
 > > What ARE you talking about, Ben??  ESR isn't fixated on the GPL by any
 > > possible measurement, and even RMS acknowledges that MIT-licensed or
 > > BSD-licensed code is free software.
 > 
 > Ah, but ESR isn't a free software evangelist, he's an (ex?) Open
 > Source(tm) evangelist,

Open Source is a marketing term for free software.  If you feel that's 
not the case, I want to know what you feel needs to be changed.

-- 
-russ nelson <rn-sig@crynwr.com>  http://crynwr.com/~nelson
Crynwr supports Open Source(tm) Software| PGPok |   There is good evidence
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice |   that freedom is the
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   |   cause of world peace.